theoryofdoom在2022-04-11~2022-04-17的言论

2022-04-16 作者: theoryofdoom 原文 #Reddit 的其它文章

218: Unofficial Daily Update for 2022-04-11. 1463 New Cases., submitted on 2022-04-12 02:00:22+08:00.

—– 218.1 —–2022-04-12 10:32:16+08:00:

A source would be helpful here, if you can find one.

—– 218.2 —–2022-04-12 12:51:56+08:00:

Don’t be obstinate. This is what you wrote:

In fact, I hate to use these words, but the flu is probably more deadly at this point.

Get a source.

219: I’m currently pursuing a PhD in Probability Theory, and have an issue with retaining methods I used a while ago., submitted on 2022-04-13 00:23:31+08:00.

—– 219.1 —–2022-04-13 10:22:41+08:00:

You are never going to actually retain the method just by reading it. And even if you can conceptualize it in some level of abstraction after reading a book or article about it, you’ll forget it a week later unless you repeatedly apply it.

So, the solution is repeated application. If you learn a new method, try to apply it. Then try to apply it in another context. Then try to apply it in another context. Do this over and over again. Or at least think through how you would apply it; work it out, or at least work out how you would work it out, whether in your head or on paper.

But try to actually apply it. Then tear apart why you probably applied it wrong and start over. Then try to re-do it. Then tear it apart and try to improve. Lather, rinse and repeat.

—– 219.2 —–2022-04-13 10:27:55+08:00:

It’s definitely true that many applied statisticians take that approach, but many statisticians are also very concerned with establishing rigor of our methods!

Shout it from the rooftops.

220: Unofficial Daily Update for 2022-04-12. 1761 New Cases., submitted on 2022-04-13 02:00:20+08:00.

—– 220.1 —–2022-04-13 09:55:05+08:00:

This is critically important to realize, even given the obvious problems associated with counting absolute rates of positives (which you and I’m sure many others have discussed on many occasions).

Taking longer views helps keeps things in perspective.

221: His parents must be so proud 🤦‍♀️, submitted on 2022-04-14 00:51:08+08:00.

—– 221.1 —–2022-04-14 10:31:15+08:00:

Someone needs to humble this boy.

An impartial observer might note that this kind of thing didn’t happen when they had corporal punishment in schools.

222: Your thoughts on this analogy by Ian Stewart, submitted on 2022-04-14 20:59:04+08:00.

—– 222.1 —–2022-04-15 09:06:36+08:00:

We define a sheep as a spherical set with no well-defined boundary that acts as a poop-valued mapping whose domain is Scotland.

This is the best thing I have read in weeks.

223: Unofficial Daily Update for 2022-04-14. 3340 New Cases., submitted on 2022-04-15 02:00:18+08:00.

—– 223.1 —–2022-04-15 09:00:12+08:00:

It turns out that “positives” vary independently from mask mandates (or mask utilization, per any such mandate). That is clearly reflected everywhere such data is available, even controlling for variability in testing rates, to the arguable extent that is possible.

Virus is as virus does. Competent evidence does not exist otherwise.

—– 223.2 —–2022-04-15 09:02:59+08:00:

It is absolutely incredible to me that people still think masks affect community spread, especially post omicron. That’s like being a Chernobyl liquidator and thinking you’re protected from radiation poisoning just because you’re wearing a gas mask.

That’s the impact of lies from those who hold themselves out as experts, but are in fact no such thing. I’m reminded of Dagny Taggart’s discussion with a certain scientist over the merits of Rearden metal.

—– 223.3 —–2022-04-15 12:14:14+08:00:

I’ll just sit back and wait for those who engaged in fraudulent advertising to be sued for misleading the public.

—– 223.4 —–2022-04-16 01:57:30+08:00:

I was curious about your claim and just read a few journal articles that say the opposite.

Please link anything you find that you think contradicts what I said. Because this exercise is something I’ve gone through with many others now.

For example, here’s a listing and explanation of several such “studies” another user previously offered for the same purpose.

There is correlation between positivity rate and mask mandates/adherance.

There are so many problems with that statement. But before I say things about it, link what you’re working from.

I’m not going to speculate about what you might have read. There is too much subject matter. More than 400 preprints — numerous of which have since been retracted — made claims that touched on these issues, which I have seen (via Google Scholar Search, about 3 months ago which was the last time I went through the purported findings).

So link what you read and we’ll talk about the following:

  1. What those papers say;
  2. The data purportedly considered (and not considered), and why that matters;
  3. The underlying methods used; and
  4. The differences between whatever you’re citing says and what I said, and why that matters.

If I was aware of a single study/paper that contradicted what I said, I would not have wrote the post above.

But who knows, maybe you’ll be the first.

224: Full Lockdown in Shanghai, this is how they broadcast announcements., submitted on 2022-04-15 10:17:32+08:00.

—– 224.1 —–2022-04-15 10:21:03+08:00:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM2PIjaSNVI

225: What Questions Do You Have For Bill Gates?, submitted on 2022-04-16 23:48:12+08:00.

—– 225.1 —–2022-04-17 04:26:46+08:00:

“Why are you buying up so much farmland?”

To manipulate commodity futures, obviously.

—– 225.2 —–2022-04-17 07:59:00+08:00:

They’re playing the same game just in a different way; they’ve been buying corn and other grain futures like they’re going out of style.

文章版权归原作者所有。
二维码分享本站